Robert Leitch

Rob Leitch is a secondary school teacher from Sidcup, Bexley. Follow Rob on Twitter.

We
are often told that history will reflect on our period of time as being the
‘digital age’ – a time of rapid and remarkable technological brilliance. A quick glance around your home will probably provide substantial
evidence of this claim. After all, you are likely to be reading this article on
a tablet, smart phone, or at least an old fashioned PC.

Central
to the digital age claim is, of course, the rise of the internet. The World
Wide Web is the biggest symbol of rapid globalisation. Over the past 20
years, those living in the West have seen the internet integrated into almost every
fragment of daily life, from fulfilling retail needs to booking holidays, from
face time to accessing shares in global markets instantaneously. Social
relationships too are not only maintained online, but increasingly can be
created in cyber space, ensuring that the internet has truly become the gateway
to the world, from the comfort of your own home or handheld device.

Yet
this happy tale of progress, flexibility, global enterprise and opportunity
would fail to be a human story without the full consequences of human nature.
Just take the last month or so. We have had the Prime Minister talking about
online pornography “corroding childhood”; the Home Affairs Select Committee
claiming that the UK is losing the war on cybercrime (worth over $388 billion
globally per year); Twitter trolls issuing rape, bomb and death threats to
celebrities, and the desperately tragic death of yet another teenager following a
shocking case of cyber bullying.

Violent pornography, internet trolls and cyber
bullying – the ugly side of the internet has been on display. In truth, it is the
ugly side of our very own society, visible in high definition through a
computer screen.

Just last week I attended the funeral of my own grandmother - she had become very frail after a number of health difficulties and so her death was not a surprise, although it remained tremendously saddening nonetheless. It is through this grandparent-like perspective that people of the so-called 'younger generation' will view the late Baroness Thatcher, herself born just a few years before my own grandmother.

In contrast, I was born in 1988 and am still (rather generously perhaps!) categorised as being part of the 'younger generation' - although as a secondary school teacher, I am already suffering from the onset of premature grey hair! Needless to say, for those of us under the age of thirty, most of our earliest memories, schooling and general life experiences would have started in earnest not under Thatcher, but first the premiership of John Major, followed by the long years of Blair.

The interesting question is whether young people can relate to this clearly powerful yet divisive figure. When Baroness Thatcher left office in 1990, there was no such thing as an iPad or a text message, although it was possible to watch Luton Town FC in the top flight of English football! Having grown up and adapted to a new technological world, does the younger generation really take sides in the Thatcher legacy squabble?

On a personal note, I pen this article with two hats on. On the one hand, I am writing as a politically interested, fully paid-up Tory who has long been reading about Thatcher the person and Thatcher the politician. My own reaction to Baroness Thatcher's death, therefore, will chime with the majority of those in our Party and wider afield who feel genuinely moved and saddened by the news. For me, Thatcherism represents the principle that you get out what you put in - that those who work hard for themselves, their families and their communities will succeed in life.

However, my own interest in politics - and thus gut reaction to the life and work of Baroness Thatcher - is quite unusual. As the Economic and Social Research Council reported last year just 13% of young people felt able to influence the political scene. Likewise, the Ipsos MORI analysis of the last General Election confirmed that the 18-24 voting category saw the lowest turnout (below 50%). None of this is a surprise, of course, and political apathy amongst the young has long been debated. For what it's worth, I subscribe to the view that young people are actually very political, just not at all interested in politicians - this in itself is not a bad thing.

Nevertheless, it is abundantly obvious that the vast majority of young people do not have the attachment to political parties or the interest in the daily workings of government that other generations do, or at least once had. It would be wrong, however, to simply suggest that younger people will not care for the news of Baroness Thatcher's passing. Rather, to many she represents an intriguing historical figure. For many of the students that I teach (albeit in an all-girls school at present), her status as being the first female Prime Minister is a source of genuine interest. Likewise, for many of my peers, her name and face is immediately recognisable.

When writing this piece, I decided to contact a small number of non-political friends aged between 19-27, to see what they made of Thatcher. This snapshot provided an insight into what I suspect is a relatively common view in the younger age groups. She was described to me as 'powerful', 'strong', 'brutal', 'harsh', and 'Iron Lady'. Whilst an array of similar words and phrases were conjured up, when pressed to give examples to back up their impression of Thatcher, few were able to do so. Amongst many of the young, Baroness Thatcher's reputation seems to be little more than a game of Chinese whispers.

As a result, Thatcher's policies do not provoke the furious debate among the young that they do with other age groups. A brief glance at Twitter yesterday was enough to confirm that older generations are utterly polarised on the former Prime Minister, ranging from steadfast adoration to venomous loathing. This is an alien perspective for younger people, amongst the majority of whom her principles and battles as Prime Minister are simply not well known. Yet the fact that she is almost universally known by name and appearance to every generation is in itself a grand tribute to her legacy.

As the Mayor of London put it in his own tweet yesterday, 'Her memory will live long after the world has forgotten the grey suits of today's politics'. It is simply because Baroness Thatcher was not another dull, bland and politically correct politician that the younger generation do at least recognise and remember her. Indeed, such simple recognition is actually quite profound, given that our current crop of politicians largely fail to attract even the slightest bit of attention from the young.

Robert James Leitch is a 24 year old, secondary school teacher who has worked for two Conservative backbench MPs. Follow Rob on Twitter.

As soon as the political leaders packed their flip flops and passports, relieved to make it through to their holidays on the back of a successful Olympics, the political silly season swung ever so predictably back into action.

With precious few noteworthy news stories around, one could be forgiven for hoping that the Government might at last benefit from a bit of well needed breathing space. As all activists who have been knocking on doors over the past few months will know, the disastrous period following the Budget seemed unending, hitting the Party in the polls and dismantling any remaining morale amongst the grassroots.

A remarkable Olympics, despite the emergence of renewed Boris mania, must have given the PM hope that a quiet couple of weeks would follow before Parliament's brief return in September where a balanced reshuffle would act as the platform for a much-needed rousing conference speech. The quiet weeks of late-August could and should have provided the space, distance and time required for a fresh re-launch and poll changing winter. Wishful thinking, eh!

Any plans to tap into the wider optimism and positivity of the Olympic spirit now seem to have been completely dashed as certain Conservative backbenchers have sought instead to make hay in the political news lull. Knowing full well that their carefully timed comments and press releases would gain more traction with editors in these slow political weeks, we have had senior Tories openly calling the Prime Minister a "chambermaid", challenging him to be a man rather than a "mouse" and demanding that he stop "pussyfooting around". Of course, the PM has experienced such displays of attention seeking before - who can forget the outspoken MP who accused the PM of being an "arrogant posh boy" just days before local elections?

Robert Leitch is a Parliamentary researcher and Chairman of CarePlus, a charity which works with the elderly in South East London. Follow Robert on Twitter.

We have all experienced the feeling before – the demoralising sense of being ripped off. I remember first feeling ripped off when I was "offered" extortionate exchange rates by my hotel whilst on holiday. Being ripped off in any setting can provoke a range of emotions: anger, frustration, weariness or resentment.

Of course, such feelings are nothing new to us Brits. When reflecting upon the current woes of our embattled Government, we should perhaps linger to consider the underlying ripped-off mentality that many ordinary, hard-working, and yet frequently forgotten about people possess after years of political (MPs’ expenses), financial (greedy bankers) and social (fraudulent benefit cheats and ASBOs et al) irresponsibility.

Paying £96 to fill up the average family car at the pumps; completing a weekly shop for a family of five; paying an extra 20% for warm food from a local bakery; facing tuition fees of £9,000 per year at university, per child; the ever-increasing parking fees at hospitals; excessive rail fares for commuters; the growing net of the 40p tax rate; the contribution of hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to the EU - the daily rip-off list in rip-off Britain is truly endless.

Is it any wonder that so many pensioners were so upset about the decision to freeze their personal allowance? I don’t actually believe that the majority of pensioners would dispute the fiscal implications of this policy, particularly with the record increase in the state pension. However, having worked hard all their lives, and having contributed to our society for decades, this targeted policy must just seem like another state-led plunder announced with minimal respect in the most casual manner.

Robert Leitch is a Parliamentary researcher and Chairman of CarePlus, a charity which works with the elderly in South East London. Follow him on Twitter at @Rob_Leitch

In the seemingly never-ending post-mortem into the failure of the New Labour project, it is commonly suggested that Tony Blair failed to capitalise on his post-landslide Labour Government during its first few years. Indeed, countless political commentators, and even Mr Blair himself, have concluded that the New Labour’s reforming agenda lost steam too quickly in the late 1990s and never quite took off again.

As with many things Blair-related, this analysis has been brooded on frequently in the highest echelons of CCHQ, and more recently Downing Street itself. The consensus is that Team Cameron must not make the same mistake. Regardless of the constraints of coalition, those at the top see radical reform as the only way to make a difference, to get results - to win the next election.

Robert Leitch is a Parliamentary researcher and Chairman of CarePlus, a charity which works with the elderly in South East London

The Winter Fuel Payment has long been a bone of contention for those who find the universal, all encompassing reach of the benefit merely a sad reflection of the excessive welfare spending embarked upon by the Labour Party after their 1997 landslide election.

The tax-free annual payment carries a standard rate of £200 per eligible household where the oldest person is under the age of 80 (but above State Pension age). For households with a person aged 80 or over, the standard rate is £300. With 12.6 million people in 9.1 million households benefiting from these payments, State spending in this area reached a total of £2.8 billion last winter alone.

A mixture of practical and political motivations combined to ensure that this benefit was perceived as being almost untouchable during the 2010 Spending Review. On the one hand, fuel poverty is not a myth in this country but a very sad reality. In certain pockets of our communities, some pensioners still have to make that dreadful choice between food or fuel; and in a 21st century Britain that is simply unacceptable. Pensioners deserve respect in later life, and they certainly deserve unequivocal support if they cannot afford to heat their own homes.

Robert Leitch is a party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

Last week’s riots across England have kick-started a wide-ranging and almost limitless debate about the state of our country’s morality, social interactions and general well-being. This debate looks likely to continue for some time as politicians in particular attempt to secure an ideological understanding of the destructive episode.

Broken families, a weak criminal justice system and poor standards of discipline in our school have, amongst other factors, been used as the basis of many arguments. In truth, it is likely that all such factors have played a role in the obvious disfranchisement of a growing minority of predominately young people.

In my view, however, an underlying issue cannot be ignored in this period of self-reflection. The concept of aspiration has simply become distorted for many young people. Likewise, the definition of "success" in life has changed between former generations and the young of today.

In part, our modern-day celebrity culture may offer some explanation. Back in 2008, I worked in a secondary school in South-East London. During my conversations with young students, I was frequently surprised at the low level of aspiration that many possessed. For most, their dreams were limited to becoming a footballer, a pop star, or some form of TV personality. Any suggestion of a career outside of these narrow parameters was often met with utter despondency.

Robert Leitch is a Parliamentary researcher and Chairman of CarePlus, a charity which works with the elderly in Bromley

With the long-awaited Dilnot Report into the funding of social care and support in England due to be published on Monday, it is clear that the Coalition faces yet another tricky spending dilemma. The issue of social care has been firmly in the public spotlight recently. Both the Southern Cross care home crisis, and BBC Panorama’s shocking footage of abuse within a private care home, have quite rightly hit the media headlines. The release of the Dilnot Report, therefore, is extremely timely.

Robert Leitch is a party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

One of the most peculiar, yet treasured consequences of an open and free democracy is that almost anybody can stand for election. Whether it be as an independent candidate or as the representative of a political party, the door to our Parliament is supposedly always open to each and every section of our diverse and vibrant society.

Despite this, however, the fallout of the 2009 expenses scandal vividly highlighted the public’s view of our politicians as being somewhat bland, dishonest and untrustworthy. Alas, Coalition Government and the resulting policy compromises and confusion over political identity have further added to this exasperation.

To certain sections of society, politics and our elected representatives have long been regarded as irrelevant. Yet, more worryingly, I would argue that there now exists an underlying lack of respect for the role of politicians in general.

This sorry reality of modern-day political life poses some rather profound questions: What is the primary role of our politicians? How do we want them act when elected? What criteria should they have to meet before even being selected as candidates? In essence, what should the DNA of a modern-day politician contain?

Robert Leitch is a party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

On Tuesday evening, BBC One repeated a documentary entitled “The World’s Worst Place to Be Gay” presented by Scott Mills, a BBC radio presenter who himself happens to be gay. The hour long piece focused on Uganda and the controversial Bill in that country which was recently put forward by David Bahati MP in an attempt to further criminalise homosexuality.

Much has previously been written about Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill and whilst its progress has been slowed down by the President for the time being, it is feared that it will shortly return either under a different name or even spilt into several different pieces of legislation.

What cannot be questioned is the clear desire of many Ugandans to further criminalise homosexuality. Sadly, permitting the use of the death penalty as an appropriate punishment to tackle homosexuality and its perceived growth amongst African countries remains a well-supported proposal in Uganda. Such a thought makes me, as a gay man, feel both depressed and rather uncomfortable.

Robert Leitch is a 22-year-old party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

Whilst flicking through the TV channels the other evening, I stumbled across ITV’s popular drama, Secret Diary of a Call Girl. For those who have never seen the show, it is based upon a character called Belle de Jour, the nickname of a former real-life call girl. In many ways the series is rather humorous, but away from the glitz and glamour of ITV’s somewhat shallow portrayal of the upmarket world of call girls, the production got me thinking about the wider reality of the UK’s often murky prostitution industry.

At present, our prostitution laws are a middle-of-the road, uncomfortable compromise. Politicians of all colours often seem too afraid to align themselves with either the full legalisation camp or the anti-prostitution camp. Indeed, our current legislation, in England and Wales at least, is somewhat contradictory. The Policing and Crime Act 2009 made it illegal to pay for sexual services “of a prostitute subjected to force”. However, working as a prostitute in private remains wholly legal as does working as an outcall escort, such as Belle de Jour.

Put simply, the message of our current stance on prostitution is this: if you are out of sight, secretive and working alone, you may continue in your dangerous profession. Given the high risk of violence as well as the prevalence of human and drug trafficking in the industry, this stance strikes me as being rather naive and remarkably irresponsible.

After all, prostitution is not going to miraculously disappear. Not only famous for its reputation as the “oldest profession”, it is currently estimated that over 100,000 people work as prostitutes across the whole of the UK. In London alone, the previous Government’s Poppy Project found that over 900 brothels (all supposedly illegal) were in operation with a combined annual turnover of approximately £120 million.

Robert Leitch is a 22-year-old party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

Equality is a peculiar concept. In essence, it is a simple belief that all people ought to be treated with the same level of respect, kindness, love and fairness. It seeks to ensure that the same unrestrained opportunities are available to all, leading to the fulfilment of potential and contributing towards the continued progression of mankind. This is the "pure"', unhindered version of extreme equality that the likes of Harriet Harman et al follow with near evangelic fervour.

At this point, equality certainly sounds like an admirable virtue, one that should perhaps be encouraged and celebrated. After all, surely all people, regardless of their differences, should be treated the same. Indeed, those who promote equality often claim to be sticking up for the disadvantaged and the unrepresented, the little guys of the world who need a voice. Equality, they protest, protects those of different sexualities, those of different ethnicities, those of different ages, those with differing opinions...ah, wait a minute. Those with differing opinions?

This is the sticking point. The extreme interpretation of equality that has been forced upon British society over the past decade is in itself a remarkable contradiction. On the one hand, it claims to protect diversity and variation yet, on the other, it ruthlessly strikes down any dissenting voices, any individual who would rather maintain the status quo. Extreme equality is, of course, better known as political correctness and its ultimate failing is that it attacks the very diversity which it seeks to promote.

Robert Leitch is a 22-year-old party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

Upon arriving at my desk on Monday morning, I undertook my daily routine of glancing through a number of political blog sites including the main stories on ConservativeHome. As an unashamed political anorak, I confess to having been particularly drawn to Jonathan Isaby’s list of the most loyal Conservative MPs.

As I trawled through the list of names followed by some of the comments left by fellow readers, it soon became apparent that this register of loyalty was instead being viewed by many as little more than a roll of shame.

Alas, it appears that a culture of championing the most rebellious MPs as independent-minded whilst dismissing loyalists as career-driven, slavish Cameroons has taken hold in some quarters of the grassroots membership.

This is a worrying trend. As a virtue, loyalty seems to be suffering from a severe lack of popular support at present. Theodore Roosevelt once stated “It is better to be loyal than famous”. Yet, in our modern political arena, sceptics view loyalist MPs as mere subjects of the Whips, often wondering whether the Whips know something about them that we do not. Likewise, allegations thrown at loyalists as being political careerists concerned only with their own promotion and future Cabinet potential are increasingly common.

Escaping any apparent thought, however, is the consideration that perhaps loyalty towards the Conservative leadership is actually an act of selfless sacrifice for the good of both the Party and the country that we serve. Quite simply, a disunited parliamentary party does not bode well for good governance. Rather, the greater the splits, the more inward-looking and irrelevant the Party appears to the general public who become fed up with the constant political spats and frustrated at a lack of decisive leadership.

Robert Leitch is a 22-year-old party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

As we embark upon the traditional holiday month of August, many of us will be looking forward to getting away for that welcome break. However, whether it be the sunshine beach resort or the quaint countryside cottage that beckons, general relaxation is only likely to begin once we have battled our way through countless roadworks, queues, accidents, delays and service cancellations to reach our destination. If truth be told, getting from A to B has never been more problematic and it is during the holiday seasons that our creaking transport infrastructure is highlighted most vividly.

We will all have experienced such travel woe before - some face it on a daily basis. From the rush hour squeeze on our undergrounds, to stationary traffic on our motorways and signal failures on our train lines, the life of a commuter is not an easy one. Add school and bank holidays to the everyday burdens already placed upon our transport system and a chaotic picture of traffic bedlam begins to take shape.

Ultimately, however, our greatest concern should be for our road networks - a quick glance at the relevant statistics is telling. Since 2001 the number of cars on Britain’s roads has risen considerably from 24.6 million to 28.5 million, whilst in 2009 the overall volume of motor vehicle traffic was 313 billion vehicle miles. Surprisingly, perhaps, 90% of all passenger travel takes place on the roads with just 7% by rail and 1% by air. Despite these figures, in 2006-07 (the latest figures available) the UK spent over £5 billion on railways and just £4.8 billion on our roads.

Meanwhile, 70% of adults now hold driving licences and over 80% of our population live in a household with at least one car. Put simply, our lust for cars and driving continues to rise ceaselessly, ensuring that the pressure on Britain’s 245,000 miles of road is set to intensify yet further. Faced with such increasing demand and usage, it is all too apparent that the status quo is simply not sustainable – significant investment is required.

Robert Leitch is a 22-year-old party activist who is working in Parliament for a Conservative MP.

For many young people these fleeting summer weeks will be a time of contrasting emotions. Initially, relief will sweep the land for the many thousands of students who will be unwinding after the anxiety and stress of the past few exam-filled months. Despite this, any celebratory tendencies are likely to be rather short lived. Not only are results about to drop through letterboxes but the harsh reality of searching for employment is also likely to kick in. The game has changed for our new graduates - the greatest challenge now is not merely getting through university but successfully moving on from it.

The truth is that our higher education system is in a desperate state. Frankly, it is failing to make the grade. After all, we now have greater numbers of graduates from an ever-wider range of often bizarre courses fighting it out for a diminishing number of so-called graduate jobs. Not only this but there still exists an expectation, amongst students at least, that graduates are entitled to a well paid, high entry-level position post-university. Add to this rather poisonous mix the well known funding problems and continuous backlog of course applications and you begin to appreciate that higher education increasingly resembles a complete minefield.

Key to any review of the situation will involve finally facing up to the reality that university standards have slipped. In the name of equality we have lowered the overall quality of graduates whilst also encouraging individuals to accept university places without proper consideration or thought. An irresponsible, shallow ‘bums on seats’ mentality has been incorporated by secondary schools and universities with a devastating impact on students and the wider system.

The claim that standards have slipped is supported by the countless numbers of business leaders who are beginning to berate the ability of recent intakes. Indeed, the Association of Graduate Recruiters is urging the new Government to take action to correct the “devaluation” of degrees in recent years. Further evidence is provided by the Forum of Private Business (FPB) which carried out a national survey of more than 4,000 firms. The results of this survey revealed that over half of employers rated graduate recruits as mediocre and lacking in basic literacy and numeracy skills.